For demonstrating so succinctly the wilful ignorance that many religionists have with regard to evolution.
You could have wasted our time but all it took was a 7 word comment and a three word sig. Ten words.
How does this one site belonging to a single country generate two-thirds of the worlds radioisotopes? How is this possible?
Perhaps because they are expensive to build/maintain but one reactor can satisfy a lot of demand?
Australia has a research reactor that is used to (among other things) produce medical isotopes, I have no idea what sort of volume it produces compared to that Canadian one though or whether we even export them.
A plane is not getting it's "GPS location" from Air Traffic control, it will work it out from GPS satellites.
Perhaps there are other navigation aids you might be able to interfere with.
It is human defined in a sense, however the humans in question aren't arbitrarily picking a point, they are basing the definition on a measurable physical property, ie the area where the Sun's magnetic field has a (dominating) effect.
a) Credit card companies close attention to merchant accounts. If your chargeback rate gets up above 1% you will have some explaining (and fixing) to do if you want to keep your account. (One reason Credit Card companies pay attention is because they charge merchants heavy fines for chargebacks, it's a good source of additional income for the card companies).
b) The article doesn't mention credit cards at all. The company may have been doing some other form of transfer (eg ACH).
If you don't know what you are talking about why not just shut the fuck up?
if they hadn't been pimping the bloody thing so much before it was anywhere near complete.
Sony seem to have put an inordinate amount of time getting people excited about something that people can't get their hands on. They seem to have done the same with Home.
Except that they are claiming that mp3s outside your shared folder are yours, but they are no longer authorized copies once they enter your shared folder?
Fair use (not authorisation) allows you to make copies for personal use.
If you are making copies to do something else (such as share on the internet) then fair use doesn't apply and the copies are unauthorized.
Apparantly you have comprehension problems too. I do not know what you are talking about. I'd have thought the question: "What the fuck are you talking about?" might have indicated that. Perhaps it was too subtle?
They are all saying that Yahoo Answers is rubbish. I haven't seen one person advocate that people should somehow be prevented from using it.
I might say that you and the original guy I replied to are both posting crap. That is not the same as saying you shouldn't be allowed to post or others shouldn't be able to read you.
This topic has absolutely nothing to do with "regulation" or a "nanny state".
Please try and compose something vaguely coherant in future. And no, randomly inserting colons and typing something in capitals doesn't magically make your point clear.
It could also be a production problem (or more correctly, there could be a production solution).
You can solve someone lacking food either by finding a way of getting food to them or finding a way of them producing (more) food locally (which may involve education and/or infrastructure).
There is also a massive range from people literally starving to where food is plentiful enough that people can engage in other activity that improves quality of living.
If you got a CD from Ubuntu Shipit then you could probably just pass it on, as you don't need any additional rights that the GPL grants to be allowed to do pass it on.
However if you download an iso and burn it yourself then you probably do need the GPL granted right to copy before you can distribute it and therefore would be bound.
In any case the Ubuntu CD's don't actually come with source on them do they?
It would be nice to know precisely what went on.
Obviously we don't have to be told, but if "MPAA don't fuck with my shit" is going to be splashed around the kernel/Debian/Ubuntu planets I think it's reasonable for people to be interested in the details.
Perhaps this story can get even wierder and the MPAA will post the DMCA notice on Chilling Effects
It would be interesting, I suppose, from an academic point of view, but it doesn't really matter.
It might matter. I don't know what they did (and there seems surprisingly little public analysis) but it's feasible to imagine a scenario where someone got the functionality they wanted by merely changing configuration files relating to the binary package rather than changing the actual source and recompiling.
If that were the case I'm not sure that they would necessarily have to distribute because of the GPL.
I'm not suggesting that is the case here, merely that it's a possible scenario.
If you are distributing binaries non-commercially and you got those binaries as is from elsewhere (ie didn't compile it yourself from source) then you can simply pass on the offer that you were given, as per 3c of the GPL.
Otherwise if I were giving a Ubuntu CD to a friend I'd have to be prepared to distribute the source to him too! As it is I can just refer him to the offer Ubuntu gave me.
That may even apply to most of the packages aggregated on the Xubuntu CD the MPAA were distributing (I haven't seen a package by package comparison, ie whether they built their own packages ot just used xubuntu's wholesale).
For the changed packages it would be interesting to know what the changes were, to the extent that can be determined without the source.
You do not have to distribute "changes in the form of a diff", or "distribute your code changes" in particular.
You must distribute (or offer to) the complete source code corresponding to the binaries you distribute. The whole purpose of the GPL is that someone getting a binary can get the full source for the binary.
Slashdot Mirror
For demonstrating so succinctly the wilful ignorance that many religionists have with regard to evolution.
You could have wasted our time but all it took was a 7 word comment and a three word sig. Ten words.
Nothing further to say.
Australia has a research reactor that is used to (among other things) produce medical isotopes, I have no idea what sort of volume it produces compared to that Canadian one though or whether we even export them.
Yes, if you buy a laptop (or mobile phone) with WiFi and Bluetooth they'll almost certainly be run off one chip these days.
A plane is not getting it's "GPS location" from Air Traffic control, it will work it out from GPS satellites. Perhaps there are other navigation aids you might be able to interfere with.
So there's a much better chance that some of the clever people capable of reverse engineering this sort of stuff will make the effort to do so.
It is human defined in a sense, however the humans in question aren't arbitrarily picking a point, they are basing the definition on a measurable physical property, ie the area where the Sun's magnetic field has a (dominating) effect.
a) Credit card companies close attention to merchant accounts. If your chargeback rate gets up above 1% you will have some explaining (and fixing) to do if you want to keep your account. (One reason Credit Card companies pay attention is because they charge merchants heavy fines for chargebacks, it's a good source of additional income for the card companies).
b) The article doesn't mention credit cards at all. The company may have been doing some other form of transfer (eg ACH).
If you don't know what you are talking about why not just shut the fuck up?
if they hadn't been pimping the bloody thing so much before it was anywhere near complete.
Sony seem to have put an inordinate amount of time getting people excited about something that people can't get their hands on. They seem to have done the same with Home.
Then you can hardly claim the copy is only for private use.
then the upside is that there will be plenty of bird-slurry food to help fish populations increase.
How much political or public sway to the "entrenched fishing interests" have?
Three fifths of bugger all I'd expect.
In the long run a large area which is never fished will probably have a rather positive effect on fish "restocking" levels.
They are all saying that Yahoo Answers is rubbish. I haven't seen one person advocate that people should somehow be prevented from using it.
I might say that you and the original guy I replied to are both posting crap. That is not the same as saying you shouldn't be allowed to post or others shouldn't be able to read you.
What the fuck are you talking about?
This topic has absolutely nothing to do with "regulation" or a "nanny state".
Please try and compose something vaguely coherant in future. And no, randomly inserting colons and typing something in capitals doesn't magically make your point clear.
It could also be a production problem (or more correctly, there could be a production solution). You can solve someone lacking food either by finding a way of getting food to them or finding a way of them producing (more) food locally (which may involve education and/or infrastructure).
There is also a massive range from people literally starving to where food is plentiful enough that people can engage in other activity that improves quality of living.
If you got a CD from Ubuntu Shipit then you could probably just pass it on, as you don't need any additional rights that the GPL grants to be allowed to do pass it on.
However if you download an iso and burn it yourself then you probably do need the GPL granted right to copy before you can distribute it and therefore would be bound.
In any case the Ubuntu CD's don't actually come with source on them do they?
this chaps comment.
It would be nice to know precisely what went on. Obviously we don't have to be told, but if "MPAA don't fuck with my shit" is going to be splashed around the kernel/Debian/Ubuntu planets I think it's reasonable for people to be interested in the details.
Perhaps this story can get even wierder and the MPAA will post the DMCA notice on Chilling Effects
If that were the case I'm not sure that they would necessarily have to distribute because of the GPL.
I'm not suggesting that is the case here, merely that it's a possible scenario.
If you are distributing binaries non-commercially and you got those binaries as is from elsewhere (ie didn't compile it yourself from source) then you can simply pass on the offer that you were given, as per 3c of the GPL.
Otherwise if I were giving a Ubuntu CD to a friend I'd have to be prepared to distribute the source to him too! As it is I can just refer him to the offer Ubuntu gave me.
That may even apply to most of the packages aggregated on the Xubuntu CD the MPAA were distributing (I haven't seen a package by package comparison, ie whether they built their own packages ot just used xubuntu's wholesale).
For the changed packages it would be interesting to know what the changes were, to the extent that can be determined without the source.
You do not have to distribute "changes in the form of a diff", or "distribute your code changes" in particular.
You must distribute (or offer to) the complete source code corresponding to the binaries you distribute. The whole purpose of the GPL is that someone getting a binary can get the full source for the binary.
A (supply/demand driven) economist or a scalper whould set the price higher than Nintendo have.